Obamacare Explained in One Sentence

DeadlySleep wrote:

PST wrote: It is silly to look at a 50-year trend and claim that the reason it has persisted into the last two or three years is some new legislation. It is just as silly as claiming that the increasing cost of health care and health insurance, which similarly represents a 50-year trend, is due to Obamacare this year.

Is it silly to overlook the fact that new legislation makes the 50th employee one of the most expensive employees on the planet?

This is a complete change of subject, which is something people often do when they have no answer to the issue under discussion. It doesn't deny my point that increases in part-time employment and increases in health care costs have been going on for decades, casting doubt on attempts to blame this year's changes on Obamacare.

But turning to the new point, it is completely incorrect to claim that the legislation "makes the 50th employee one of the most expensive employees on the planet." Employers of 50 or more full-time employees are supposed to offer them health insurance. If they don't, and some of their employees therefore turn to the exchanges and receive some kind of subsidy or tax credit to help them pay their premium, then the employer faces a "shared responsibility" charge. How much? $2,000 x (number of full-time employees minus 30). So, in the worst case, that 50th employee could cost an extra $40,000 ($2,000 x 20). Clearly that does not make the employee one of the most expensive on the planet. Moreover, while $40,000 isn't nothing, it is pretty modest for a business that employs 50 people. A business with 50 employees, even at very low pay, will probably have payroll costs of $2 million or more already when payroll taxes, worker's comp, unemployment taxes, and fringe benefits are counted.

I think this style of argument is rather silly, to be honest. You just can't always apply the same rules to General Electric and Bob's Burgers. There are many areas of the law in which small business is favored with simplified or less expensive requirements. That means there will always be a threshold of growth beyond which some additional costs accrue. Businesses inevitably make the choice to grow, because getting bigger is how we make more money. And if a business decides to hold the line at 49 because it wants to avoid providing health insurance, then someone else who does want to grow will pick up the slack and grow at its expense. This is one of those anti-Obamacare talking points that falls apart when you analyze it.

idamtnboy wrote:

Cutnstuf wrote:NASA's budget for the space program since 1958 has averaged $9 billion a year.

How much good could have been done with that kind of money? Think of the jobs that could have been created.

Jobs were created. How else do you think all the rockets, fuel tanks, mission guidance systems, etc., etc. were made if it wasn't for people being employed? All the astronauts and mission staffs were paid, weren't they? Money has value only by being spent for someone's labor!

In that case, why not have the government send everyone a paycheck, we'd be the only country with 100% employment rate. Jim

To those of you that think the american indian got a raw deal, they did they lost the war and their lands to U.S. forces, and after the invasion we didn't rebuild their country, the U. S. rebuilds every country except the U.S.

idamtnboy wrote:

Cutnstuf wrote:NASA's budget for the space program since 1958 has averaged $9 billion a year.

How much good could have been done with that kind of money? Think of the jobs that could have been created.

Jobs were created. How else do you think all the rockets, fuel tanks, mission guidance systems, etc., etc. were made if it wasn't for people being employed? All the astronauts and mission staffs were paid, weren't they? Money has value only by being spent for someone's labor!

Before you describe this as an economic windfall, please stop and think about where that $9 billion per year came from.

1. It came from individual taxpayers who would otherwise have spent it creating jobs and improving their lives. Individuals who have a long track record of spending their own money more efficiently than governments spend other people's money.

- or worse yet -

2. it came from future individual taxpayers, our kids, grandkids and great grandkids who will have less money to spend on improving their lives and creating jobs.

Sheffey wrote:

idamtnboy wrote:

Cutnstuf wrote:NASA's budget for the space program since 1958 has averaged $9 billion a year.

How much good could have been done with that kind of money? Think of the jobs that could have been created.

Jobs were created. How else do you think all the rockets, fuel tanks, mission guidance systems, etc., etc. were made if it wasn't for people being employed? All the astronauts and mission staffs were paid, weren't they? Money has value only by being spent for someone's labor!

Before you describe this as an economic windfall, please stop and think about where that $9 billion per year came from.

1. It came from individual taxpayers who would otherwise have spent it creating jobs and improving their lives. Individuals who have a long track record of spending their own money more efficiently than governments spend other people's money.

- or worse yet -

2. it came from future individual taxpayers, our kids, grandkids and great grandkids who will have less money to spend on improving their lives and creating jobs.

Just imagine where neck brace technology would be without NASA

http://www.necksolutions.com/comfort-neck-collar.html

The Comfort Neck Collar Uses Advanced Material Developed For
Nasa Astronauts And Provides A Unique And Comfortable,
Firm Support For Neck Pain Relief

Sheffey wrote:

idamtnboy wrote:

Cutnstuf wrote:NASA's budget for the space program since 1958 has averaged $9 billion a year.

How much good could have been done with that kind of money? Think of the jobs that could have been created.

Jobs were created. How else do you think all the rockets, fuel tanks, mission guidance systems, etc., etc. were made if it wasn't for people being employed? All the astronauts and mission staffs were paid, weren't they? Money has value only by being spent for someone's labor!

Before you describe this as an economic windfall, please stop and think about where that $9 billion per year came from.

1. It came from individual taxpayers who would otherwise have spent it creating jobs and improving their lives. Individuals who have a long track record of spending their own money more efficiently than governments spend other people's money.

- or worse yet -

2. it came from future individual taxpayers, our kids, grandkids and great grandkids who will have less money to spend on improving their lives and creating jobs.

Well, considering we're $17 Trillion in debt, #2 may be the correct answer.
Plus, it allows the government to conjure up more ways of taking more money from those who could have used it to create more jobs and improving their lives (#1).


Den

.

Sheffey wrote: Before you describe this as an economic windfall, please stop and think about where that $9 billion per year came from.

1. It came from individual taxpayers who would otherwise have spent it creating jobs and improving their lives. Individuals who have a long track record of spending their own money more efficiently than governments spend other people's money.

- or worse yet -

2. it came from future individual taxpayers, our kids, grandkids and great grandkids who will have less money to spend on improving their lives and creating jobs.

I didn't describe it as an economic windfall, just an economic reality.

1. Have you forgotten the fundamental rule for the wealthy live by - OPM? Other Peoples Money! When the money is spent it creates jobs, regardless of who is spending it. As I said above, money has value only when it is exchanged for labor, and the fruits of labor.

2. Who do you think is going to support your retirement? Sure, it may be money you saved up, but you saved that money only by loaning out the excess value of your labor. You will want the value of that labor returned in the form of bread, milk, gasoline, automobiles, etc., when you retire. Your children's and grandchildren's labor will support you. That really is in a sense no different than Uncle borrowing from one part of society to employ another part. The lender will be repaid someday by someone's future labor, be in a borrowing situation, or in retirement saving situation. It's a difficult concept to wrap your mind around, and most economists don't know to do it. At least that's the way I see it.

idamtnboy wrote: Who do you think is going to support your retirement?

I'm hoping that a vibrant immigrant population will fund my retirement. (Actually, its probably too late to help mine, but my wife may see some benefit. ) Last year the resident White population actually declined for the first time, so obviously the Ponzi scheme of Social Security can't survive without fresh meat. The median non-Hispanic white age is 42, while the median Hispanic age is 28. To put it another way, the "American Way of Life" will be saved by the children of immigrants (legal and otherwise), just as it has been in the past.

idamtnboy wrote: Sure, it may be money you saved up, but you saved that money only by loaning out the excess value of your labor. You will want the value of that labor returned in the form of bread, milk, gasoline, automobiles, etc., when you retire. Your children's and grandchildren's labor will support you. That really is in a sense no different than Uncle borrowing from one part of society to employ another part. The lender will be repaid someday by someone's future labor, be in a borrowing situation, or in retirement saving situation. It's a difficult concept to wrap your mind around, and most economists don't know to do it. At least that's the way I see it.

Actually, this is exactly what economists deal with. Of course, given the differing opinions, its debatable how well they actually understand it!

I hadn't picked up my guitar in a long long time and this morning I was playing it and one of the songs reminded me of this thread. So I googled for it on YouTube in hopes that NSA will make several copies of it.

The results of Obama's constitutional care in one song ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl1EE0X1wjM

We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
And I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again

Change it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fall that's all
But the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
And I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
No, no!

I'll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky
For I know that the hypnotized never lie

Do ya?


There's nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now the parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around me
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwS1tC9Mp00
This was the actual second concert I ever attended about 38 years ago for like $5 while working as a 15-yo grocery clerk for like $2.50/hr (I made about 25 cents over minimum wage at the time -- cuz I was worth it ... ).
You'd be lucky to find an equivalent concert today for $200 and the minimum wage today is I think less than $9.
Wage inflation has just never been able to keep up with Federal Reserve inflation and that is the insideous way that the bankster cartel took control of our government and turned the once wealthiest population in the world into debt slaves.

DreamStalker,
Sounds like we're from the same time and place. I still play my guitar, in fact, I teach guitar to help supplement my SS. Saw The Who perform, Tommy at Central Park in NYC around '70.

Keep the faith,

Cut

Cutnstuf wrote:DreamStalker,
Sounds like we're from the same time and place. I still play my guitar, in fact, I teach guitar to help supplement my SS. Saw The Who perform, Tommy at Central Park in NYC around '70.

Keep the faith,

Cut

Yep. Tommy was a classic but I was too young for that concert tour ... I had the album though.

As for faith ... I have none to keep, not religious and not political. I used to vote for the lesser of two evils which meant always voting against GOP candidates and also voting against DEM candidates when given a 3rd party choice. However, I've lost complete faith in the US political system as well as our federal government system (which has been hijacked by corporate fascists to harvest what is left of this nation's physical wealth). I have no faith in the SS retirement system (for people my age and younger) and no faith that Obamacare will make the healthcare system any better in any way -- it is broke beyond repair and completely in the hands of greedy corporations who have no interest in health, but only for their faith in unlimited profit.

Faith ... it is useless for anything other than games of chance -- and then only when you win.

Don't stop playing your guitar ... when I play I momentarily feel better about everything.

I remember going to the midnight movie every Friday night in the mid-70's to watch Woodstock ... I was too young for that too but wished I could have been there.

One of my favorite scenes in that movie ... Soul Sacrifice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBG6IaSQCpU

Why all you fogies can't leave the comfort of your retirement and restart the soicio-polical movement of the 60's hippie era I don't know ... now is the time when we need that type of movement the most.

DreamStalker wrote:

Cutnstuf wrote:DreamStalker,
Sounds like we're from the same time and place. I still play my guitar, in fact, I teach guitar to help supplement my SS. Saw The Who perform, Tommy at Central Park in NYC around '70.

Keep the faith,

Cut

Yep. Tommy was a classic but I was too young for that concert tour ... I had the album though.

As for faith ... I have none to keep, not religious and not political. I used to vote for the lesser of two evils which meant always voting against GOP candidates and also voting against DEM candidates when given a 3rd party choice. However, I've lost complete faith in the US political system as well as our federal government system (which has been hijacked by corporate fascists to harvest what is left of this nation's physical wealth). I have no faith in the SS retirement system (for people my age and younger) and no faith that Obamacare will make the healthcare system any better in any way -- it is broke beyond repair and completely in the hands of greedy corporations who have no interest in health, but only for their faith in unlimited profit.

Faith ... it is useless for anything other than games of chance -- and then only when you win.

Don't stop playing your guitar ... when I play I momentarily feel better about everything.

I remember going to the midnight movie every Friday night in the mid-70's to watch Woodstock ... I was too young for that too but wished I could have been there.

One of my favorite scenes in that movie ... Soul Sacrifice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBG6IaSQCpU

Why all you fogies can't leave the comfort of your retirement and restart the soicio-polical movement of the 60's hippie era I don't know ... now is the time when we need that type of movement the most.

I was one of those 30+ year old hippies - my sister, who was at Woodstock (and "slightly remembered" being there ) thought of me as a "wannbe" because of my age, but I still play all the music and yes I yearn for the return of the spirit of those days and the causes.

The pragmatist in me wants Obamacare to succeed although I would have preferred a single payor system like Medicare, but this was the best we could get for now. It is ironic that the people attacking Obamacare as socialistic fail to understand or believe that large parts of the law were written by America's private health insurance co.'s lobby. They run around fretting about "socialism" which refers to:

Government ownership of Industry

whereas what we now have in this country is the opposite:

Industry ownership of Government!

Best wishes, Nate

NateS wrote:
whereas what we now have in this country is the opposite:

Industry ownership of Government!

Best wishes, Nate

What is going on? You seem to be wiser.

ChicagoGranny wrote:

NateS wrote:
whereas what we now have in this country is the opposite:

Industry ownership of Government!

Best wishes, Nate

What is going on? You seem to be wiser.

How do you not get this? It would seem to me that you would be wiser. I'm sure you read and watch TV. But alas, I always forget that you watch Fox News!

ems